Skip to main content

Irys for Word is here. Install Free →

AI rules by state · AZ

AI Rules for Lawyers in Arizona 2026

By Sabih Siddiqi, founder of Irys and former BigLaw litigatorVerified as of June 2026
AI disclosure required?
Case-by-case
Competence rule
ER 1.1
AI / technology CLE
No tech or AI requirement

Quick answer

Arizona does not require lawyers to disclose AI use as a blanket rule. The Arizona courts' steering committee on AI issued ethical best practices that apply the existing duties of competence, confidentiality, and communication to AI. The lawyer must verify every AI-generated citation before filing.

Ethics guidance

Arizona Steering Committee on AI and the Courts, Generative AI: Ethical Best Practices

November 2024

Arizona's reference point is the guidance from the Arizona Steering Committee on Artificial Intelligence and the Courts, issued in November 2024 under a court administrative order.

The guidance applies existing duties to AI: competence and diligence, confidentiality, and communication with clients and supervisors. It does not create a new disclosure rule, and the lawyer remains responsible for verifying AI output.

Source: Arizona Courts, Generative AI Ethical Best Practices (PDF)

Disclosure rules

Are Arizona lawyers required to disclose AI use?

Arizona imposes no blanket duty to disclose AI use. The committee's guidance addresses client communication through the existing rules rather than a categorical disclosure mandate.

Counsel should review the assigned court's rules and the judge's standing order in each matter.

Source: Arizona Courts, Generative AI Ethical Best Practices (PDF)

Sanctions on record

AI hallucination sanctions in Arizona

No Arizona state-court AI-hallucination sanction is on record as of June 2026. A federal court in the District of Arizona sanctioned an attorney in 2025 for filing fabricated AI citations and referred her to her licensing bar, but that matter arose in federal court rather than an Arizona state court.

Source: State Bar of Arizona, warning on AI hallucinations

Competence duty

The competence rule and AI (ER 1.1)

The competence duty in Arizona is Ethical Rule 1.1, with a comment adopting the ABA standard that competence includes the benefits and risks of relevant technology. The courts' guidance reads this to cover AI.

Source: State Bar of Arizona, warning on AI hallucinations

CLE requirements

Continuing legal education in Arizona

Arizona requires 15 CLE hours each year, including at least 3 hours of ethics. There is no AI or technology-specific requirement as of June 2026.

Source: State Bar of Arizona, MCLE requirements

How to stay compliant

A practical checklist for Arizona lawyers

Arizona's guidance comes from the courts themselves, so reading the assigned court's AI expectations is a practical first step.

Review the assigned judge's standing order and the court's local rules at the start of every matter. AI disclosure obligations generally sit at the court and judge level rather than in a single statewide rule.

Verify every citation and quotation before filing, and read the underlying authority. Most AI sanctions have resulted from citations the lawyer never personally verified.

Do not enter confidential client information into public AI tools without confirming how the tool handles data and, where there is material confidentiality risk, obtaining the client's informed consent.

Inform the client when AI use materially affects the matter, and honor any client instruction that limits AI use.

Bill only for time actually spent drafting prompts and reviewing output, not for time the tool saved.

Keep any required technology or AI continuing-education credit current, and treat AI competence as part of your duty under the competence rule.

When evaluating tools, look for citation grounding that ties output to verifiable authority, a vendor commitment not to train on client data, and audit trails. These reduce risk, but they do not replace the lawyer's own review.

Frequently asked

Arizona AI rules: common questions

Not as a blanket rule. The Arizona courts' steering-committee guidance addresses client communication through the existing duties rather than a categorical disclosure mandate. Counsel should still check each court's rules.

Generative AI: Ethical Best Practices, issued in November 2024 by the Arizona Steering Committee on AI and the Courts. It applies competence, confidentiality, and communication duties to AI and leaves responsibility for verifying output with the lawyer.

Not in Arizona state courts as of June 2026. A federal court in the District of Arizona sanctioned an attorney in 2025 and referred her to her licensing bar, but that arose in federal court.

No. Arizona requires 15 CLE hours per year, including 3 hours of ethics. There is no AI or technology-specific requirement.

Legal AI rules in nearby states

Practising across state lines? Compare Arizona’s rules with its neighbors.

This page is general information, not legal advice. Rules change, and the obligations that apply to your matter depend on your court, your judge, and your facts. Verify the current rules with the Arizona state bar and the assigned court before you rely on anything here. Last verified June 2026.

Built for lawyers who have to verify everything

Irys grounds its output in verifiable authority, keeps client data out of training, and maintains a record of the work. See how it fits your practice.

Book a Demo